alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EX-10.5



 Exhibit 10.5 

PCS Nitrogen Fertilizer, L.P. 

1101 Skokie Blvd, Suite 400 

Northbrook, IL 60062 
 June 29,
2018 
 Innophos, Inc. 
 259 Prospect Plains Road, Building A

 Cranbury, NJ 08512 
 Attention: Kim Ann Mink, Ph.D. 

Dear Ms. Mink: 
 Reference is hereby made to that certain
Services Agreement (the “Services Agreement”), dated as of the date hereof, by and between PCS Nitrogen Fertilizer, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership (“PCS”), and Innophos, Inc., a Delaware corporation
(“Innophos”). Capitalized terms used herein and not otherwise defined shall have their respective meanings set forth in the Services Agreement. 

1. Nitrogen Plant Sale. If PCS sells (a) substantially all of the assets that comprise the Nitrogen Plant, PCS shall cause the buyer to assume
PCS’s remaining obligations under the Services Agreement, or (b) assets that (i) comprise a portion of the Nitrogen Plant, and (ii) are required for the provision of certain Services (such assets described in sub-sections (i) and (ii), the “Specified Assets”), PCS shall cause the buyer to assume the obligations of PCS to perform the Services in accordance with the Services Agreement for which the
Specified Assets are required (the “Affected Services”) for the duration of the Initial Term and any Renewal Term. Provided that PCS complies, and causes its Affiliates to comply, with the requirements of this Section 1, PCS
and its Affiliates shall be released from further liabilities and obligations (x) under the Services Agreement, or (y) relating to the Affected Services, as applicable. 

2. Incorporation of Services Agreement Provisions. The provisions of Article VI of the Services Agreement are hereby incorporated herein and made a
part hereof as if fully set forth herein. 
 3. Counterparts. This letter agreement may be executed in counterparts, all of which together shall
constitute a single instrument. 
 Please execute this letter agreement in the space provided below to indicate your agreement to the terms hereof. 

[Signature Page Follows] 







 
			
	 Sincerely,

	  
 PCS NITROGEN FERTILIZER, L.P.

		
	By: 	 	/s/ Charles Magro
		 	Name: Charles Magro
		 	 Title: Authorized Person and

President and CEO, Nutrien Ltd.



  

			
	Accepted and Agreed:
	
	INNOPHOS, INC.
		
	By: 	 	/s/ Kim Ann Mink
		 	Name: Kim Ann Mink, Ph.D.
		 	Title: Chairman, President and CEO

 [Signature Page to Services Agreement Side Letter]
#### Hayes v. Johnson

16708

4/09/96

Affirmed
18977

#### State v. Nguyen

Affirmed
Exhibit 31.b

I, Marc Teal, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Boston Capital Tax Credit Fund III L.P.;
2. Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
4. The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:



1. designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;
2. evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and
3. disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and





1. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



1. all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and
2. any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.



|Date:  November 19, 2004 | /s/ Marc N. Teal                          
|------------------------ | ------------------------------------------
|                         | Marc N. Teal, 
Principal Financial Officer
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

# AGENCY:

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

# ACTION:

Notice of charter renewal.

# SUMMARY:

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), announces the renewal of the charter of the Board of Scientific Counselors, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control (BSC, NCIPC).

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Christopher Harper, Ph.D., Designated Federal Officer, Board of Scientific Counselors, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Department of Health and Human Services, 1600 Clifton Road NE, Mailstop S106-9, Atlanta, Georgia 30329-4029. Telephone: (404) 718-8330; Email:                         *CRHarper1@cdc.gov.*

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

CDC is providing notice under 5 U.S.C. 1001-1014 of the renewal of the charter of the Board of Scientific Counselors, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Department of Health and Human Services. This charter has been renewed for a two-year period through November 5, 2025.

                    The Director, Office of Strategic Business Initiatives, Office of the Chief Operating Officer, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, has been delegated the authority to sign                     **Federal Register**                     notices pertaining to announcements of meetings and other committee management activities, for both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.                

Kalwant Smagh,

Director, Office of Strategic Business Initiatives, Office of the Chief Operating Officer, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

[FR Doc. 2023-26041 Filed 11-24-23; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
Motion for Extension of Time

To File Appellant’s Brief on Appeal

No. 03-15-00144-CR

 

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TEXAS, AT AUSTIN

 

Christopher Arthur Kurtz, Appellant

 

v.

 

The State of Texas, Appellee

 

On Appeal from the 207th District Court of Comal County in

Cause No. CR2014-343, the Hon. Jack H. Robison, Presiding

TO THE HONORABLE THIRD COURT OF APPEALS:

COMES NOW, Christopher Arthur Kurtz, Appellant in the

above styled and numbered cause, by and through John G.

Jasuta, his undersigned attorney of record, and respectfully enters

this “Motion for Extension of Time to File Appellant’s Brief on

Appeal,” and in support of such Motion would show the Court:

I

Appellant was convicted of the offenses of Aggravated

Kidnapping, Evading Arrest or Detention with a Vehicle and

Tampering with Physical Evidence. Punishment was assessed at

terms of Seventy (70) years, Seventy-five (75) years, and Thirty (30)

ACCEPTED

03-15-00144-CR

4935934

THIRD COURT OF APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS

4/17/2015 2:20:21 PM

JEFFREY D. KYLE

CLERK

 FILED IN 3rd COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 4/17/2015 2:20:21 PM JEFFREY D. KYLE Clerk
years confinement. The trial court imposed sentence on November

20, 2014. Notice of Appeal was timely filed with the clerk of the

trial court on February 17, 2015, a motion for new trial having

been filed.

II

The deadline for filing Appellant’s Brief with the Court is the

23rd day of April, 2015. This request for an extension is based

upon the inability of his undersigned attorney to finish research

on the issues raised by the trial of the case. 

III

Said attorney would further show that he will require an

additional forty-five (45) days in which to complete the research

and prepare Appellant’s Brief on Appeal. This is Appellant’s first

request for an extension of time in which to file his brief.

Prayer

WHEREFORE PREMISES CONSIDERED, Appellant prays this

Honorable Court to grant his “Motion for Extension of Time to File

Brief on Appeal,” and Order that the deadline for filing such be

extended an additional forty-five (45) days, until June 8, 2015, or

until such time as set by this Court.
Respectfully submitted,

__________________________________

John G. Jasuta

Attorney at Law

Post Office Box 783

Austin, Texas 78767-0783

eMail: lawyer1@johngjasuta.com

Tel. 512-474-4747

Fax: 512-532-6282

State Bar No. 10592300

Attorney for Christopher Arthur Kurtz

Certificate of Compliance and Delivery

This is to certify that: (1) this document, created using

WordPerfectTM X7 software, contains 355 words, excluding those

items permitted by Rule 9.4 (i)(1), Tex.R.App.Pro., and complies

with Rules 9.4 (i)(2)(B) and 9.4 (i)(3), Tex.R.App.Pro.; and (2) on

April 17, 2015, a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing

“Motion for Extension of Time To File Appellant’s Brief on Appeal”

was transmitted via the eService function on the State’s eFiling

portal,to Joshua Presley (preslj@co.comal.tx.us), counsel of record

for the State of Texas. 

______________________________________

John G. Jasuta
Order entered October 15, 2012

In The

.’lgift igtri t of igexa at aRag

No. 05-12-01373-CV

IN RE JUSTIN LEE ASKEW, Relator

On Appeal from the 204th District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F05-51334-Q

ORDER

The Court has before it relator’s October 9, 2012 petition for writ of mandamus. The

Court requests that real party in interest, The State of Texas, file a response by October 23, 2012.

JUSTICE
#### Joseph B. MORA, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. Delmar LARSON, Sheriff, Salt Lake County, Defendant and Respondent.

No. 13972.

Supreme Court of Utah.

Sept. 25, 1975.

Jack W. Kunkler, of Salt Lake Legal Defender Assn., Salt Lake City, for plaintiff-appellant.

Vernon B. Romney, Atty. Gen., R. Paul Van Dam, Salt Lake County Atty., Donald Sawaya, Deputy Salt Lake County Atty., Salt Lake City, for defendant-respondent.

ELLETT, Justice:

One Joseph B. Mora was charged in California with the crimes of kidnapping and murder. His fingerprints were taken, and he was 'bound over to stand trial after a preliminary hearing. He left California, and the Governor of that State sent to the *521Governor of Utah extradition papers in proper form and requested a return of Joseph B. Mora. The Governor of Utah issued a rendition warrant, and the petitioner (plaintiff) was arrested. He filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus and appeals from the denial of his petition.

At the hearing he offered no evidence, although he claimed that he was not the Joseph B. Mora sought by the California authorities. On appeal he claims that there was no proof that he is the wanted person.

The respondent (defendant) called two men qualified in fingerprinting, and each testified positively that the prints of the wanted man which were included in the request for extradition, certified to by the Governor of California, were identical to the prints of this petitioner, whose prints were taken upon his arrest.

On appeal the petitioner claims that the burden was on the respondent to show that he was the wanted person.

The law is to the contrary. The sheriff here made a prima facie case by showing that the petitioner bore the same name as that of the wanted man. The burden then was upon the petitioner to offer proof and to convince the trier of the facts that he was not the Joseph B. Mora demanded by California.1 In addition thereto, in extradition proceedings the Governor’s rendition warrant makes a pri-ma facie case and shifts the burden to the petitioner to show that he is not the person named therein.2

The judgment dismissing the petition is affirmed. No costs are awarded.

HENRIOD, C. J., and CROCKETT, TUCKETT, and MAUGHAN, JJ., concur.

1

. *Ex parte Freeman,*80 Ariz. 21, 291 P.2d 795 (1955).

2

. *People ex rel. Mortensen v. O’Brien,*371 Ill. 351, 20 N.E.2d 782 (1939); *People ex rel. Teitelbaum v. Ryan,*181 App.Div. 404, 168 N.Y.S. 787 (1918); *Ex parte Quale,*164 Tex.Cr.R. 313, 298 S.W.2d 174 (1957).
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               JAN-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                    OCT-31-1999
<CASH>                                 541
<SECURITIES>                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                            0
<ALLOWANCES>                             0
<INVENTORY>                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                     4,141
<PP&E>                             898,763
<DEPRECIATION>                      57,350
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                     896,054
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>            1,827,578
<BONDS>                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                    0
<PREFERRED>                              0
<COMMON>                            37,867
<OTHER-SE>                               0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>       898,763
<SALES>                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                         0
<CGS>                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                       59,372
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                    (59,372)
<INCOME-TAX>                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                (59,372)
<DISCONTINUED>                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                          0
<CHANGES>                                0
<NET-INCOME>                       (59,372)
<EPS-BASIC>                       (0.002)
<EPS-DILUTED>                       (0.002)


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                        DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                             JUN-30-1996
<CASH>                                        11,361
<SECURITIES>                                  24,433
<RECEIVABLES>                                 19,548
<ALLOWANCES>                                       0
<INVENTORY>                                        0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                              60,542
<PP&E>                                        28,132
<DEPRECIATION>                                12,359
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                96,181
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          8,511
<BONDS>                                          672
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              0
<PREFERRED>                                        0
<COMMON>                                          52
<OTHER-SE>                                    84,463
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  96,181
<SALES>                                            0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              49,110
<CGS>                                              0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 35,522
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                33
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               14,600
<INCOME-TAX>                                   5,515
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            9,085
<DISCONTINUED>                                     0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    0
<CHANGES>                                          0
<NET-INCOME>                                   9,085
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   0.44
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   0.43
        

</TABLE>
H. Res. 340 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

June 25, 2015. 

Resolved, That the Senate amendment to the bill (H.R. 

1735) entitled ‘‘An Act to authorize appropriations for fiscal 

year 2016 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of 

the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel 

strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes.’’, in 

the opinion of this House, contravenes the first clause of the 

seventh section of the first article of the Constitution of the 

United States and is an infringement of the privileges of this 

House and that such bill, with the Senate amendment thereto, shall be respectfully returned to the Senate with a message communicating this resolution. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
#### Dudoit v. Clifton

27933

02/16/2007

Denied

— Hawai'i -, — P.3d -
**Exhibit 23**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We hereby consent to the incorporation byreference in the Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-106574) of Pamrapo Bancorp, Inc. of our reports dated March 12, 2009, relating to the consolidated financial statements, which appears in the Annual Report to the Shareholders, which isincorporated by reference in this Annual Report on Form 10-K and the effectiveness of the Pamrapo Bancorp, Inc. internal control over financial reporting, which appears in this Form 10-K. 

 

 

/s/ BEARD MILLER COMPANY LLP 

Beard Miller Company LLP 

Clark, New Jersey 

March 12, 2009
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    EXHIBIT 21.1

                SUBSIDIARIES OF STANDARD MANAGEMENT CORPORATION

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                PERCENTAGE OF    STATE OR COUNTRY IN
                     NAME OF SUBSIDIARY                          OUTSTANDING       WHICH ORGANIZED
                     ------------------                         -------------    -------------------
<S>                                                             <C>              <C>
Standard Life Insurance Company of Indiana..................         100%        Indiana
Dixie National Life Insurance Company.......................        99.3%        Mississippi
Standard Marketing Corporation..............................         100%        Indiana
Standard Marketing International, Ltd. .....................         100%        Bermuda
Standard Administrative Services, Inc. .....................         100%        Indiana
Standard Management International S.A. .....................         100%        Luxembourg
Premier Life (Luxembourg) S.A. .............................         100%        Luxembourg
Premier Life (Bermuda) Limited..............................         100%        Bermuda
Standard Development, LLC...................................          50%        Indiana
Standard Acquisition Corporation............................         100%        North Carolina
Standard Investor Services Corporation......................         100%        Indiana
</TABLE>
122 P.3d 299

INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF HAWAI'I

October 26, 2005

26894

#### J.B. v. Senda

Affirmed
Breadcrumb

1. Home

2. Print 

3. Pdf 

4. Node 

5. Entity Print 

The Attending Veterinarian’s Role in

the USDA Inspection Process

Last Modified: 

Print

Attending Veterinarian Information - Select a Topic - ▾ Go

Communication with the attending veterinarian is important to the USDA inspection

process. USDA inspectors want to verify that regulated facilities are keeping their

attending veterinarian informed about any animal health concerns and that they are
following the guidance of their attending veterinarian.

When the attending veterinarian is able to be present for a USDA inspection, it

provides opportunity for in-depth discussions between them, the USDA inspector,

and the licensee or registrant.  Such discussions are helpful in ensuring that

everyone has the same understanding regarding any animal health issues and all

instructions from the attending veterinarian. 

Since USDA inspections are unannounced, we recognize that the attending

veterinarian may not be available during the time we are at the facility.  If the

attending veterinarian is not able to be present during an inspection, written records

are our primary source of information regarding the attending veterinarian’s

directions for clinical and preventive care.

An inspector will routinely review the written program of veterinary care and make

sure the facility understands the instructions and is correctly carrying out the

veterinarian’s directions.  We may also review other written records such as medical

records or any treatment orders. 

On occasion a USDA inspector may have questions that are not addressed in any of

the written records at the facility.  When this occurs, we will reach out to the

attending veterinarian for more information. 

When the attending veterinarian can make themselves available to answer the

USDA inspector’s questions, either during an inspection or in a timely manner

following the inspection, it helps us verify that regulated facilities are providing the

attending veterinarian with sufficient authority to ensure adequate care and welfare.

The attending veterinarian is also encouraged to reach out to the USDA inspector if

they have any questions or concerns about an inspection or any citations.  See the “

How should attending veterinarians contact USDA?” topic for more information.

Animal Welfare Inspection Guide
19935

#### Kim-Rivera v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.

Affirmed